ArticleActa orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica2022
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Estonian version of the Oxford Knee Score.
Article in Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to adapt the Estonian version of The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and test its psychometric properties.
methodsThe original OKS questionnaire was translated into Estonian using the forward and back-translation method recommended in the literature. The face validity of the Estonian OKS was then tested. 150 consecutive patients who had undergone total knee replacement (TKR) received the Estonian version of OKS, the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain by mail twice with an interval of 1 month. OKS total score, its functional, and pain subscales were examined. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed. Reliability was evaluated by measuring test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Construct validity was measured by examining the correlation of OKS, its functional and pain subscales with VAS and the subscales of SF-36.
resultsThe Estonian version of OKS was assessed equivalent to the original and was satisfactorily accepted by patients on face validity testing. The Estonian OKS performed well on psychometric testing with good test-retest reliability (Spearman's rho 0.8887, P < 0.001, for the overall score) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha for the overall score 0.9353 and 0.9177 on the first and second assessment, respectively). It showed expected correlations with SF-36 subscales (strongest with the physical functioning and pain subscales and weakest with the emotional functioning subscale) and a strong correlation (Spearman's rho -0.8618 and -0.6967 on the first and second assessment respectively) with VAS for pain. A small proportion of patients demonstrated a ceiling value on both assessments, whereas a floor effect was not evident.
conclusionThe Estonian version of OKS is a reliable and valid instrument providing a standardized measure of patient-reported outcome for evaluating the results of TKR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Prognostic Study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.